HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2023-02-08 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Construction Industry Commissioner Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 30 November 2022.)

Mr COWDREY (Colton) (10:40): I rise today to support the Construction Industry Commissioner Bill 2022 for a number of reasons: (a) it is the right thing to do and (b) this is a government that is increasingly engulfed by crisis. Our health system is in crisis, our child protection system is in crisis, and there is a cost-of-living crisis in this state. SA has the highest inflation rate in the nation, and many South Australians would say that that is a crisis.

There is another crisis emerging here in South Australia. However, in the case of this particular crisis, the Labor government cannot blame the former state government or the former federal government or failed chief executives or global forces or even COVID. They cannot blame any of these things, or someone else, because this crisis strikes at the very heart of this government, with this Premier and at the core of the Labor Party. Indeed, this crisis is the escalating militant trade unionism in this state and the rise of the thuggish CFMEU led by the infamous union boss John Setka on building and construction sites right across South Australia.

One only needs to walk out of this building on North Terrace and look up into the sky to see flags of the CFMEU flying high over nearly every building and construction site in South Australia—they were not there 12 months ago; or read headlines in the paper such as 'Monopoly of power: CFMEU threaten construction industry' and 'Master Builders warns CFMEU is flexing muscle in South Australia'; or even catch a tram, only to find it covered in CFMEU advertising; or, more importantly, talk to the small and family business people, like we do every day, who are worried about rising costs in the industry. A militant trade union movement could see their businesses crumble to the ground and negatively impact the building industry that supports so many South Australian jobs, families and livelihoods.

Something has to be done, and action must be taken and taken quickly. The premise of the bill before the house today is simple: to provide for a construction industry commissioner who will promote the rights of building and construction industry participants, respect for the rule of law and work health and safety, something that I would have thought every member of this place would support, including the Premier. After all, he supposedly has no tolerance for thuggish union behaviour on building sites.

If passed, the commissioner will act as a one-stop shop for the building and construction industry to register any concerns, whether they relate to safety, industrial action, allegations of coercion or threatening behaviour or any other relevant matters. The commissioner will fill the void left by the systematic destruction of the Australian Building and Construction Commission at the hands of the Albanese government by facilitating the resolution of complaints through measures such as mediation and making representations on behalf of notifiers and complainants in accordance with relevant legislation such as the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2009 and the Work Health and Safety Act 2012.

Importantly, the commissioner will have the power to direct matters to state and federal authorities such as SAPOL, the Commissioner for Consumer Affairs, the Commonwealth Ombudsman or the office of the Fair Work Ombudsman if it is the opinion of the commissioner that a matter raised by a participant in the building and construction industry should be referred.

The commissioner will shine a light on behaviour on workplaces and worksites with an annual reporting mechanism to this very parliament setting out any and all complaints made and any practices or conditions that have affected the builders and contractors within the industry and will have the ability to suspend work health and safety (WHS) entry permits if he or she is satisfied that a WHS entry permit holder has contravened the Work Health and Safety Act 2012.

We also want to ensure that if an individual does give notification or make a complaint to the commissioner they are protected from threats, from coercion or from intimidation as a result. Penalties of up to $10,000 for individuals or $50,000 for body corporates will apply if such behaviour does occur.

This opposition is serious about addressing this crisis. The CFMEU is a trade union which needs to be kept in check. You only need to look across the border to Victoria to see that. It needs to be kept in check to protect workers and employers to ensure that major projects do not come under threat and ensure that businesses in South Australia are able to grow and prosper.

The opposition wants a bigger and better South Australia where all industries are not subject to events seen interstate and recently here in South Australia. We want the building and construction industry to succeed, to grow and to support South Australian jobs, families and livelihoods without the influence of thuggish union behaviour that does not belong in this state.

We need a construction industry commissioner before it is too late. We on this side are happy to pass. All we are waiting for is those opposite to get on board and pass what they preach. If the Premier is serious about stamping out this sort of behaviour in the industry in South Australia, he simply has to reach out his hand to pass this legislation and do something about it. Words are cheap. Actions speak louder. It is the Premier's turn to step up.

Mr WHETSTONE (Chaffey) (10:47): I would like to make a brief contribution to the debate on this important bill. I would like to echo the sentiments of the member for Colton, the shadow treasurer. It is important that we do have the safeguards in place for our building and construction industry because, as we now know, the state government, the Malinauskas government, is relying very heavily on the union movement not only during election campaigns. The issue that worries me is about the commitment and some of those promises that were given to the union movement prior to the election.

We now see a large amount of movement within those union organisations that is affecting a lot of the construction industry. What I must say is that we have seen some of that bullying, we have seen some of that union movement particularly into the service sector within the construction industry, and that worries me. I think the behaviour and the intimidation that is infiltrating some of those businesses should worry every person in this chamber.

Some of those are large businesses and some of them are medium to small businesses, but it is having an impact. It is taking away the competitive advantage that many of these businesses have had here in South Australia for many years.

In my previous life I worked in the construction industry, but it was a different construction industry: it was in the oil and gas sector. We know that the union movement did have a presence back then, but that diminished over time because what we needed and what businesses were doing was taking responsibility for themselves. We saw a decline in the numbers within union movements, within union organisations.

We now see some of those heavy-handed tactics coming back into our construction sector. As the shadow Treasurer has said, the John Setka-led CFMEU movement has the writing on the wall that we are going to see increased union activity on building sites in the construction sector, and that worries me. That will be an ongoing cost.

I want to reiterate that I am all for safety, I am all for employers making sure that their employees are given satisfactory remuneration, they are given a satisfactory and safe working environment, and they are also given a satisfactory understanding of what is expected of them through the course of their tenure, whether it is a contract on a job or worksite or whether it is a permanent capability within that business or organisation. However, I do want to reflect on some of that movement.

If we look globally, not just look here in South Australia but look globally, I have someone very close to me who has what I would call a medium to large construction company in the US. He is dealing with some of those union movements over there, but they deal with that in a different way. There are enterprise bargaining agreements, there are negotiations done before the jobs take place, and there is an ongoing commitment to looking after that workforce.

If unions are feeling the pressure that these businesses are doing the right thing but are not securing membership numbers with tradesmen or construction workers or a particular workforce on that site, they will come out and put up a big, blow-up black cat at the gate. That is one way of telling people passing by that they are not happy, that those businesses are not engaging or are being intimidated by the union movement.

At the end of the day I think we need to be very conscious that if an operating business, whether it be in construction, building or management, are doing the right thing they will continue to do business. They will continue to operate in a manner that is acceptable not only to the contractor, to the owner, to the proponent of a project. It is of paramount importance that they agree to a set of occupational health and safety measures so that we have a healthy working environment and we have a safe working environment.

Up in the Riverland we have quite a large building sector. The majority of it is small home builders, but we also have a number of aspirational small to medium contractors who are doing larger-scale work who are now feeling that pressure of the union movement coming on to worksites, interrupting what has been agreed terms or conditions. What that is doing now is distracting some of the people on site, distracting the management of those worksites, and I do not think that is healthy.

I know the intimidation I encountered when I worked at a car manufacturing plant many years ago. Because I was not prepared to join a union movement, all of a sudden rather than working on high tolerance machines I was sweeping floors. I was doing all the work that was deemed payback. I do not want to see that sort of thing come into play.

That is why it is important that we look at ways a commissioner would facilitate and encourage fair treatment on those building construction sites, the participants, and also the commercial dealings in relation to matters that generally relate to their workplaces. We want to see the commissioner act as a one-stop shop for the building and construction industry and to register any concerns relating to safety, the industrial action and, of course, allegations of coercion and threatening behaviour.

That is what we have seen already in South Australia, with the introduction of the now Malinauskas Labor government being endorsed by the CFMEU. We see bad behaviour behind the scenes, not only in a private environment, and we see intimidation. As I have said, it is something that I do not think is acceptable. That is why we must endorse a commissioner to be that person, that go-to, who will facilitate a resolution of complaints through measures, particularly through mediation and making representations on behalf of the notifier's complaints in accordance with the relative legislation.

Obviously, we want to make sure that with the endorsement of the commissioner we have a profitable, safe environment but also a competitive environment so that we do not see larger companies coming in riding roughshod over some of those medium to smaller companies, because we need to support and provide a level of confidence for people who are starting up. We need to provide a level of confidence for those people who are new entrants into the construction sector, currently maybe a small business, to make sure that they can look to expand, look to employ more people or look to comply with a safe working environment. That is the way that I started my career.

I came away from a large manufacturing sector into the construction sector. I was always told that if I was to be part of management, the number one priority was to make sure that people were kept safe, they were looked after, they were given appropriate remuneration and there would be consequences if that was not applied. As an example, I remember working down at Penrice. I went out onto the big soda ash plant, nine storeys up, and I questioned a piece of scaffold nine storeys up outside a building. As you could well imagine, it is somewhat intimidating to walk out onto a piece of scaffold nine storeys up. I questioned the safety aspect of that scaffold, and I was told to pull my head in and to get out there and do the job.

By the way, that scaffold gave way as I was out there removing a large flange on a piece of pipework. That was the day I resigned from that job. I went away and then went on to make my primary producing and farming career more of a full-time permanent role, rather than doing some of that construction work on the side. The reason for those comments is that I was told to get out there and do that—and that was a union official telling me to do it. That is why it is important that we do endorse the construction industry commissioner, and I will continue my remarks at another opportunity.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Odenwalder.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT